Conference Agenda

While burdens can fulfill legitimate and meaningful functions in a welfare state, they can be especially consequential for those lacking sufficient resources to cope with the related costs. Literature on administrative burdens shows that these procedures are more likely to be applied to people who are politically powerless or socially unpopular and often significantly affect those with fewer financial resources and limited human capital (Moynihan et al., 2015). Intersectionality in Administrative Burden is often ignored in the research, even though the idea of administrative burden has been widely applied to study oppressed groups, particularly the unique challenges faced by immigrant women. Immigrant women who are at the crossroads of immigration status and particularly vulnerable are substantially exposed to these burdens. This study delves into the experience of immigrant women from outside the EU/EEA (students and workers) in Finland and Denmark concerning administrative burdens in Immigration services. We address the question, how do immigrant women from outside the EU/EEA (students and workers) experience administrative burdens in immigration services through the lens of Nordic Governance? What do these experiences reveal about inclusion and exclusion within democratic governance? In the Finnish case, we conducted 30 interviews with immigrant women based in Helsinki (n=15) and Turku (n=15) as primary data. In the Danish case, we use multiple secondary data sources from existing studies on this topic. Aiming to address gaps in the literature and contribute to the theoretical advancement of administrative burden theory for immigrants, specifically women.

This paper deals with the effects of digitalization on the social self-administration of the German pension system – by examining a digitalization process of the objection procedure within the German pension system. Within this key area of self-administration elected representatives of pensioners and employers review cases in which the administration has denied claims by insured persons. Until now, the handling of objection cases has been largely paper-based: volunteers receive documents about denied claims by post and can only request additional materials during committee meetings. A digitalization process is currently being initiated, primarily aimed at providing the mentioned documents electronically.

Empirical data collected through 22 interviews and three group discussions reveal that the expectations and demands of the volunteers regarding the extent of the digitalization process varies significantly. While some of them advocate for more comprehensive digital solutions – such as full digital access to the files of respective objections or the ability to comment on and discuss documents digitally prior to committee meetings – others are satisfied with merely digitizing the existing analog process. These differences reflect distinct understandings of their roles: those seeking greater participation and responsibility in self-administration also demand enhanced digital tools; those who see their role limited to reviewing cases in the traditional manner perceive no need for such innovations.

The core argument of this study is that the specific design of the digital solution to come involves not only technical considerations but also decisions about the relationship between the self-administration and the administrative element of the German pension system. Choices regarding digital access and participation options simultaneously shape the scope and quality of social self-administration in the digital age.